Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Yadav @ Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The appellate court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal, granting anticipatory bail to the appellants with conditions.
Summary
The appellants Sonu Kumar Singh, Chhotu Yadav and Amit Kumar appealed against the order of the District and Additional Sessions Judge rejecting their anticipatory bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The informant Ashok Ram alleged that the accused blocked his movement, assaulted him and, in particular, that Chhotu Yadav struck his son with a stick while using caste slurs, leading to an FIR. The appellants contended that only Chhotu Yadav was responsible and that they were falsely implicated. The High Court observed that the principal offence of caste-based assault was attributable to Chhotu Yadav and that the other accused did not merit denial of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower court’s order, allowed the appeal and granted anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions regarding bond, sureties, cooperation with investigation and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act despite the FIR alleging assault and caste-based insult.
- Whether the lower court erred in assigning an omnibus role of assault to the appellants other than the principal accused.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- caste based assault
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3504 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Buxar
======================================================
1. Sonu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Yadav @ Sonu Kumar Son of Bihari Yadav
Resident of Village- Taranpur PS -Rajpur District- Buxar
2. Chhotu Yadav @Manjit Kumar son of Jami Yadav Resident of Village-
Saranaw, Ps- Rajpur, dist- Buxar
3. Amit Kumar son of Srikant yadav @ Shrikant Singh Resident of Village-
Trilochanpur, Ps- Rajpur, Dist- Buxar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ashok Ram son of Late Vakil Ram Resident of Village- Bhaluha, PO-
Hethua, Rajpur, PS- Rajpur, Dist- Buxar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Satyapal Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
order dated 22.07.2025 passed by the learned District and
Additional Sessions Judge-1st–cum-Special Judge SC/ST
(P.O.A.) Act in connection with SC/ST Buxar P.S. Case No. 13
of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under sections
126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
and section 3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (P.O.A.) act
whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has
been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3504 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
3. There is no appearance on behalf of the informant,
notice has been validly served and duly signed by the informant
Ashok Ram.
4. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that without any provocation the accused persons blocked his
movement and assaulted. Allegation against Chulbul Yadav is
of giving Tangi blow on the head of his son while taking caste
name and when the villagers came to the rescue, they escaped.
His son was taken to Primary Health Centre, Rajpur and then
referred for better treatment. This led to the F.I.R..
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that a
perusal of the F.I.R. would show that though presence of the
appellants have been shown, allegation of assault and taking
caste name is on Chulbul Yadav, these appellants have falsely
been implicated.
6. Learned Spl. PP opposes the prayer submitting that
their presence have been shown.
7. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the fact that the main role is against Chulbul Yadav, even the
caste name was taken by him, these appellants have been
assigned omnibus role of assault, in that background, this Court
is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3504 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
8. The impugned order dated 22.07.2025 passed by
the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-1st–cum-
Special Judge SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act in connection with SC/ST
Buxar P.S. Case No. 13 of 2025 stands set aside and the appeal
is allowed.
9. Let the appellants, named above, in the event of
arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-1st–cum-Special
Judge SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act in connection with SC/ST Buxar P.S.
Case No. 13 of 2025.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the appellant who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the appellant shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the appellant shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3504 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the appellant shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for next six months to mark his
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted
before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the appellant shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the appellant shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.